Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1
ENTERPRISE DEVELOPMENT AND MARKET
COMPETITIVENESS (EDMC)
EVALUATION OF THE BRIDGES BETWEEN
EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS AND BUSINESSES IN
ARMENIA
December 10, 2011
This report was produced for review by the United States Agency for International Development. It was
prepared by the USAID Enterprise Development and Market Competitiveness Project implemented by The
Pragma Corporation and its partners.
2
ENTERPRISE DEVELOPMENT AND MARKET
COMPETITIVENESS PROJECT
EVALUATION OF BRIDGES BETWEEN EDUCATIONAL
INSTITUTIONS AND BUSINESSES IN ARMENIA
DECEMBER 10, 2011
Contract Number: AID-111-C-11-00001
USAID/COTR: Conan Peisen
Chief of Party: Alexander Babinov
Developed by: Krassen Stanchev, PhD
Frunzik Voskanyan,
Tigran Tananyan
This document was made possible by the support of the American people through the United States
Agency for International Development. The contents are the sole responsibility of the authors and do
not necessarily reflect the views of USAID or the US government.
3
Content
Abbreviations ................................................................................................................................................................................. 5
Acknowledgements ...................................................................................................................................................................... 5
Objective, approach and methodology ........................................................................................................................................ 6
Objective ......................................................................................................................................................................................... 7
Approach ......................................................................................................................................................................................... 7
Methodology .................................................................................................................................................................................. 7
Perception survey and statistical evidence ........................................................................................................................ 7
Types of “bridges” assessed .................................................................................................................................................. 8
Findings ............................................................................................................................................................................................... 10
1. VET schools, Colleges, and Universities ..................................................................................................................... 10
Employability programs ........................................................................................................................................................ 10
Graduates’ links with alma maters .................................................................................................................................... 10
Internships ............................................................................................................................................................................... 11
Private sector participation in curricula development ................................................................................................. 12
Teachers as consultants and business people ................................................................................................................. 12
Courses by business executives and enterprise professionals ................................................................................... 13
Private sector financed activities ........................................................................................................................................ 14
Formal and informal events ................................................................................................................................................. 14
Business evaluation of graduates and curricula .............................................................................................................. 15
2. Business Organizations (Associations, Chambers) .................................................................................................. 16
Employability programs ........................................................................................................................................................ 16
Graduates’ participation in company projects ............................................................................................................... 17
Internships ............................................................................................................................................................................... 17
Business participation in curricula development ........................................................................................................... 17
Teachers and professors as consultants .......................................................................................................................... 18
Business professionals as teachers .................................................................................................................................... 18
Financing courses and R&D ................................................................................................................................................. 18
Joint events .............................................................................................................................................................................. 19
Participation in evaluation .................................................................................................................................................... 19
Dual Careers ........................................................................................................................................................................... 19
3. Reference group assessments ....................................................................................................................................... 21
Conclusions from the questionnaire and interviews .............................................................................................................. 21
Comparison of answers of businesses and educational institutions ......................................................................... 21
Core impressions from face-to-face interviews ............................................................................................................ 22
4. Evidence of mismatch ........................................................................................................................................................... 24
Employment turnover ................................................................................................................................................................ 24
Education institutions and private sector students ............................................................................................................ 25
Youth unemployment in other countries and Armenia .................................................................................................... 28
Worldwide Experience ........................................................................................................................................................ 28
Armenia .................................................................................................................................................................................... 29
Qualified labor: regular gaps identified by the World Bank ............................................................................................. 30
Overall conclusions and recommendations .............................................................................................................................. 31
Conclusions .......................................................................................................................................................................................... 31
Recommendations ...................................................................................................................................................................... 32
Upgrading bridges between labor supply and demand ...................................................................................................... 32
Employability ............................................................................................................................................................................. 32
4
Private sector involvement .................................................................................................................................................. 33
Follow up............................................................................................................................................................................................ 33
Appendix 1......................................................................................................................................................................................... 35
Averages for educational institutions .................................................................................................................................... 35
Appendix 2. Questionnaires on bridges between business and education ....................................................................... 36
Schools / colleges / universities questionnaire .................................................................................................................... 36
2. Business chambers and guilds questionnaire ................................................................................................................... 37
Appendix 3. Surveyed and interviewed organizations ............................................................................................................ 38
List of surveyed organizations ................................................................................................................................................. 38
List of interviewed organizations ............................................................................................................................................ 39
5
Abbreviations
BEEPS –Business Environment and Enterprise Performance Survey
CAPS – Competitive Armenia Private Sector
ETF - European Training Foundation
GCR – Global Competitiveness Report
GOA – the Government of Armenia
MOES – Ministry of Education and Science
NCVD - National Council for Vocational Education and Training Development
NSS – National Statistics Service of the Republic of Armenia
VET – Vocational education and training
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank those individuals and organizations who devoted their valuable time to
answering our questionnaires and made themselves available for in-depth discussion of the
current state of affairs of the Armenian labor market and educational institutions.
6
Introduction
There appears to be a consensus in Armenia that there is a mismatch between demand and
supply for qualified labor and that there is little up-to-date information on the actual demand.
This information is necessary so that the educational institutions can respond to market signals
and supply the needed skills and professions.
CAPS sponsored “National Competitiveness Report Armenia 2010: Higher Education
Challenge” concluded in its analysis of the situation: “What is needed is better information on
the labor market, policies that promote economic growth and labor absorption, and more
academic counselors to advise on career choices or act as liaisons between industry and the
institution.”1
A recent European Training Foundation (ETF) report on “Business and Education: Armenia”
addressed the same problem. It found that “the importance of cooperation between business
and education has been increasing and it is recognized as a vital tool to make human resources
development in line with the requirements of the society and of the economy.” However, “the
existing experiences remain isolated cases of best practice, mainly originating from individual
ideas and good will, whose methodology and results do not contribute at the improvement of
the system”.2
The process of connecting labor market supply and demand, businesses, the economy, and the
educational institutions has started. The Government of Armenia (GOA), business chambers
and guilds, and VET institutions (schools, colleges and universities), assisted by international
donors, have undertaken numerous initiatives to deal with the challenge. They have utilized
new and upgraded channels to link supply and demand for qualified labor and established and
strengthened relationships with institutions such as career centers, the National Council for
Vocational Education and Training Development, sectoral committees for educational
standards, boards of vocational education institutions, training and competitiveness/innovation
funds, etc).
Objective, approach and methodology
This survey represents a continuation of previous efforts to explain the situation and offer
workable solutions.
1 National Competitiveness Report Armenia 2010: The Higher Education Challenge, Economy and Values Research Center,
Yerevan, 2010, p. 53. The report quotes a 2008 survey of engineering companies, 80% of which are dissatisfied with the
practical knowledge of graduates and more than 50% found the graduates’ theoretical knowledge to be insufficient (Ibidem).
This information is very different from the data from World Bank – EBRD 2009 BEEPS survey: the percent of Armenia firms
identifying an inadequately educated workforce as a major constraint is 22.9 - much lower than the average for Eastern Europe
and Central Asia (30.7%) or the world (27.4%), see:
http://enterprisesurveys.org/Data/ExploreEconomies/2009/armenia#workforce . 2 Milena Corradini, Business and Education Study: Armenia, Turin, ETF, September 2010, p. 3, 4. The islands of best practice are
reviewed on pages 7-10; see also annexes that feature Yerevan State Trade and Service College, Yerevan State Armenian–
Greek College of Tourism, Service and Food Industry and State Engineering University of Armenia and Synopsys Armenia.
7
Objective
The objective is two-fold:
To understand whether VET schools, colleges and universities are working to increase
the employability of their students through adjusting their curricula to what is
demanded by the economy as well as to measure their success in doing so;
To provide a simple, easy to perform survey on the above mentioned issues.
Approach
We measured the utility of efforts and practices that were expected to bridge gaps in the labor
market and reviewed the statistics and other sources that could help us understand this
process.
We assumed that:
The supply and demand for a competitive workforce is private sector driven;
The interventions brought to bear shall facilitate communication between business and
educational institutions;
The educational system, as a core aspect of the human capital and workforce
development process, represents a form of human capital investment and it is closely
related to enterprise competitiveness.
Methodology
Perception survey and statistical evidence
In order to assess the efficiency, usefulness and quality of the existing bridges between labor
supply and demand, we compiled a brief questionnaire, which asked respondents to state
whether respective bridges existed and to what extent they were being utilized by their
organization to assess their quality.
This part of our survey was controlled via a reference group of respondents and another group
that was interviewed face-to-face.
The respondents were: forty-one representatives who were directors and managers of nine
VET schools, seven chambers and guilds, thirteen universities and four experts as a reference
group. After we collected the answers, a broader reference group of organizations was used
for in-depth interviews to interpret the answers. The group consisted of three business
entities, two VET schools, two colleges and two universities. The questionnaire itself was
compiled after preliminary meetings with representatives of seven GOA bodies (national and
regional), six donor organizations, three VET schools, three colleges, three universities, four
enterprises and three not-for-profit entities.3
3 Similar questionnaires were previously used to assess conditions for workforce competitiveness in Croatia, in
2003 by Kevin E. Murphy of JE Austin & Associates and Evelyn Ganzglass of Educational Development Center Inc.,
and in Bulgaria in 2004 by one of the authors with the assistance of Kevin Murphy and Evelyn Ganzglass.
8
The last part of the survey is a review of recent hard data on the labor supply-demand
mismatch, Armenia employment turnover and VET trainees financed by medium and large
enterprises4, on youth unemployment, and on international labor supply-demand mismatches.
The results are indicative and will be used to identify the current challenges for both the
demand and supply side of the labor market. They are fully representative of the educational
system since questionnaires and interviews covered more than 20% of the universities, 10% of
the colleges and 20% of the VET schools. In terms of representing business attitudes, the
findings are valid for the community as a whole, but not necessarily for the specific challenges
firms encounter in economic sectors.
Types of “bridges” assessed
The questionnaire lists ten such bridges:
1. Programs that place graduates in jobs and trace their employability and careers (e.g.
career centers, scholarship initiatives, student career clubs, department/officers that
help students find jobs); in the case of businesses, such activities may include job offers,
CVs circulated, and needed personnel consultations, etc.;5
2. Alumni participation in their former school’s, college’s and/or university’s programs;
in the case of businesses, these links would be viewed as employees’ participation in
such programs;
3. Matching supply and demand represented by internships;
4. Participation of employers in curricula development; whether it is through established
formal bodies like NCVD, sectoral committees, VET management bodies, or on a
private and informal basis;
5. Work of teachers and professors as consultants for businesses. It helps them
understand the demand for knowledge, skills and professional qualifications; this work
may be performed as part of the education institution’s strategy or privately, as a
secondary employment opportunity;
6. Courses taught by business executives at educational institutions. This helps both
sides of the equation; a typical example of these would be business managers teaching
MBA courses in specialized VET institutions;
7. If the above mentioned courses represent an in-kind participation of businesses in the
education of future workers and professionals, the courses and R & D financed by
businesses would, by contrast, represent a form of long-term commitment;
4 These are the enterprises reporting NSS. 5 The term “program” in the broadest sense.
9
8. To a considerable degree, organic relations between businesses and education
emerge from bonds of trust and mutual understanding; the joint events attended by
both the educational institutions and businesses may help in building this sense of trust;
9. The private sectors’ role in testing the output of the educational system;
10. This covers the dual careers of business professionals who are teachers and teachers
who are also business professionals; This is commonly found in a number of specific
occupations (lawyers, accountants, statisticians and financiers), but it could also include
other professional areas.
10
Findings
1. VET schools, Colleges, and Universities
Employability programs
With regard to the question of whether or not educational institutions have programs to assist
students in finding jobs, all universties answered that they have such programs; only 14% of
colleges and 22 % of VET schools responded that they did not have such programs. The VET
schools are expected to educate workers with a distinct set of skills, employable in presumably
well-defined sectors and businesses; the entire school is such a program – all students are de
facto interns (see Chart 1.3). As for the colleges – their students would often be roughly the
same age as university students, facing similar career challenges.
Chart 1.1
Question 1. Are there programs to assist students in finding jobs?
Those who have such programs rated the effectiveness of the programs above average:
VET schools – 6.0,
Colleges – 6.3,
Universities – 5.7.
Graduates’ links with alma maters
Approximately 80% of the three institutions indicated that their alumni are regularly
participating in their projects and programs.
11
Chart 1.2
Question 2. Is there participation by those who graduated from schools/colleges/universities?
The quality of participation was rated:
VET schools – 5.7,
Colleges – 5.2,
Universities – 5.9.
Internships
Chart 1.3
Question 3. Are there easy and popular intern practices?
Not surprisingly, internships represent the most popular bridge between demand and supply in
the labor market; more than 90% of the surveyed institutions (100% in the case of VET schools)
indicated that they have internship programs.
The quality of the programs is:
VET schools - 6.7,
Colleges – 7.0,
Universities – 6.2.
12
Private sector participation in curricula development
When asked about the private sector's participation in their curricula development, the
answers were different: the higher the education institution level the lower the participation.
Chart 1.4
Question 4. Is there private sector participation in curricula development?
Only 23% of the universities indicated that there is such participation; however, 43% of the
colleges and 78% of the VET schools indicated such participation. Expectedly, the effectiveness
of private sectors’ participation also differed widely – from nearly “excellent” to “below
average”:
VET schools– 4.6;
Colleges - 3.7;
Universities – 8.0.
Teachers as consultants and business people
Sixty-nine percent of the universities responded that their professors work either as
consultants or in businesses; the number is lower for the colleges – 43%, and for the VET
schools – 33%.
Chart 1.5 –
Question 5. Do teachers and professors work as consultants?
13
The institutions whose teachers are working for a business rated the quality and the
effectiveness of their response as follows:
VET schools - 4.0,
Colleges- 5.7
Universities -6.4.
Purely private consulting contracts tend to decapitalize schools, colleges and universities.
Presumably, the educational institution would benefit if they formalize such opportunities and
build their consulting reputations.
Courses by business executives and enterprise professionals
Less than half of the institutions: universities – 46%, colleges – 43% and VET schools – 33%,
reported that they have courses taught by business professionals.
The question does not specify whether these are courses in business management, MBA
programs, or whether they are part of introductory or advanced programs in economics and
applied sciences.6
Chart 1.6
Question 6. Are there courses taught by business executives?
Those who provide such courses rated their usefulness above average;
VET schools -6.7,
Colleges – 6.0,
Universities – 6.8.
6 The business perspective is necessary for educational institutions in understanding business and entrepreneurship,
as is familiarization with entrepreneurs’ views on operations, technologies and human capital.
14
Private sector financed activities
Chart 1.7
Question 7. Is there private financing of courses and R & D?
Forty-six percent of the universities answered that the private sector is funding courses and
R&D activities; however, 29% of the colleges and none of the VET schools reported this.
VET schools – 0
Colleges – 4.5
Universities – 5.2
Formal and informal events
The easiest and most inexpensive way to consult with businesses does not seem to be very
popular with VET schools, but it is common with colleges and universities. Chart 1.8
Question 8. Are there joint events attended by both teachers/academics and businesses?
Those who attended such events rated their quality and usefulness as follows:
VET schools - 6.0,
Colleges – 6.6,
Universities – 5.3.
15
Business evaluation of graduates and curricula
This bridge is a logical continuation of the practice to invite business professionals to take part
in curricula development. It reinforces that those who helped set educational programs are
entitled to judge the output. About half of the institutions (universities – 46%, colleges – 43%
and VET schools – 44%) indicated that the businesses were involved in the evaluation of the
quality of the education.
Chart 1.9
Question 9. Are businesses involved in the evaluation of education and curricula?
If we compare these answers with those of Question 4, we will find that: in VET schools the
businesses are 40% more likely to take part in curriculum development than in the evaluation of the outcomes; in colleges, businesses are equally likely to take part in both processes; and with
universities, business professionals are twice as likely to participate in the evaluation of
educational programs, rather than drafting them.
The quality ratings
VET schools – 4.5
Colleges – 4.0
Universities -6.3.
Dual careers
Chart 1.10
Question 10. Are there dual careers: teachers/academics working in business and business
professionals in academia?
16
Sixty-nine percent of the universities, 71% of the colleges and 33% of the VET schools
responded that their faculties have dual careers. They rated the quality of their answers as
follows:
VET schools – 5.0,
Colleges – 3.4
Universities – 6.0.
2. Business Organizations (Associations, Chambers)
Chart 2.1 summarizes the business assessments of the utility of all the bridges between labor
supply and demand.
Chart 2.1: Summary of business assessments
On the 10-grade assesment table, the businesses evaluated the system as just above average –
5.5. The self-assesment of the universities was nearly 6.2, colleges – 5.2, and VET schools –
4.9.
The sample is too small to provide information on business assesment of different levels of
education institutions. However, businesses’ answers to some of the questions differ
substantially from the self-evaluation of the educational institutions.
Employability programs
Only 43% of surveyed business organizations agreed that universities, colleges or schools
approached them to find jobs for their students and graduates. The answer to the same
question from the educational institutions is that more than 87% approached business
organizations to find jobs for their students and
graduates – a major difference.
Chart 2.2
Question 1. Do schools / colleges /universities
approach you (a business) when they assist students
and graduates in finding jobs?
17
The average utility grade of those business organizations which answered “Yes” is only three.
This is the second lowest average quality grade from the business side.
Graduates’ participation in company projects
Chart 2.3
Question 2. Do you accept school/college/university undergraduates to participate in your
company’s operations?
All business organizations and chambers answered that
they had university undergraduates participating in their
operations. However, when they assessed the quality of
this cooperation, the average was 4.7 - less than half of
the best grade and representing the third lowest
average. Only two out of seven business organizations
gave high grades (8 and 10) for the quality of this
participation. For the remaining five organizations, the
“Yes” responses were just 3.
Internships
The majority of business organizations and chambers answered affirmatively regarding utilizing
interns in their organizations. Forty-three percent of the surveyed do not use interns. For
those who answered Yes, the average rating was 5.3.
Chart 2.4:
Question 3. Do you accept interns?
Business participation in curricula development
Only 29% of the respondents indicated that they have
participated in development of
school/college/university curricula. The overwhelming majority of the surveyed organizations
answered negatively. Similarly is the percentage of bridges available in the next two instances –
the invitation of educational professionals as consultants and of business executives to teach.
18
Chart 2.5
Question 4. Do you participate in school/college/university curricula development for professions
your company would need?
However, the average grading of the positive answers was somewhat higher at 8 points (see
chart 2.1).
Teachers and professors as consultants
The majority of the surveyed business organizations stated that they do not invite teachers and
professors to work as consultants or as part time contractors. Only 29% answered positively.
The average grading of the Yes answers is 5.
Business professionals as teachers
The majority of respondents (71%) answered that they are not being invited to teach and train
in schools and universities that educate in professions needed by business organizations.
However, the average ranking of Yes answers is 9.5.
Financing courses and R&D
The overwhelming majority of the surveyed business organizations answered negatively about
financing courses and R&D at schools, colleges and universities. Only 14% said that they have
provided such support.
Chart 2.6
Question 7. Do you finance courses and R & D at schools/universities?
19
The average grading of Yes answers was 2 points. Meanwhile, it should be noted that 29% of
the colleges and 46% of the universities stated they have courses financed by the private sector.
Joint events
The fact that all the surveyed business organizations confirmed that they have participated in
such events may mean that there are regular attempts to improve institutional linkages.
The average of the Yes answers is 5.1; only two business organizations provided a grade higher
than 5; the remaining five rated it 3.6.
Participation in evaluation
The majority (71%) of surveyed business organizations answered that they do not participate in
the evaluation of the quality of education and curricula for professions they need. Only 29% of
the respondents answered Yes to this question. However, when participation takes place, its
utility is assessed slightly above average - 5.5.
Chart 2.7
Question 9. Do you participate in the evaluation of the quality of education and curricula provided
for professions you may need?
Dual Careers
The majority (57% - considerably less than what is declared by colleges and universities) of the
surveyed business organizations stated they have dual careers in their companies. The average
quality is assessed at 6.8 points.
20
Chart 2.8
Question 10. Are there joint/dual careers in your company, meaning do teachers/academics work
on longer term basis in businesses and entrepreneurs in academia?
21
3. Reference group assessments
The reference group was asked to assess the overall situation in the country.
Chart 3.1: Assessment of the situation in the country (the reference group)
There is no assesment criteria that graded higher than 5 points, and the overall evaluation score
was 3.3; most particularly the assesment scores for bridging factors such as keeping alumni
involved, participation of business professionals, enterprise professionals as teachers, trainers,
and dual careers, are low.
Table 1: Summary assesments of all categories of respondents
employa
bility
alu
mni
inter
ns
curric
ula
consulta
ncy
execut
ive
financ
ing
eve
nts
Testi
ng
mixed
career
Educational institutions VET
schools 6.0 5.7 6.7 4.6 4.0 6.7 0.0 6.0 4.5 5.0
Colleges 6.3 6.0 7 3.7 5.7 6 4.5 6 4 3.4
Universities 5.7 5.9 6.2 8 6.2 6.8 5.2 5.3 6.3 6
Business 3.7 4.7 5.3 8 5 9.5 2 5.1 5.5 6.8 Reference
group 5 2.5 4.5 4 3 2 3.5 5 1.5 2
Conclusions from the questionnaire and interviews
Comparison of answers of businesses and educational institutions
There is a clear discrepancy between the answers given by educational institutions and business
organizations and by the reference group and impressions from face-to-face interviews.
Universities, colleges and VET schools are generally more optimistic regarding the quality of the bridges and rate their effectiveness much higher than do business respondents. The enterprises
22
are on the user-end of the system and are rather pessimistic. The reference group is even
more pessimistic.
On one hand, about 80% of VET schools and colleges and 100% of universities indicated that
they help their students to find jobs; on the other hand, about 60% of the surveyed business
organizations answered that educational institutions do not approach them when searching for
jobs for their students.
Additionally, 90-100% of the educational institutions answered that they have easily accessible
and popular internship programs. All business organizations stated that the students take part
in their projects and programs but only 57% of them take interns. Business organizations’
evaluation of internship programs are 1-2 points below the self-evaluation of educational
institutions.
Another significant discrepancy is indicated by the answers to the question on the private
sector’s participation in curricula development: 78% of the VET schools and 43% of colleges
answered positively; but only 30% of private sector respondents indicated that they were
involved in the process. Overall:
It appears that the high self-evaluation of the universities, colleges and schools should be corrected downwards by at least one point; this correction comes from the evaluation
of the reference group and the businesses as end-users of skill and qualifications supplied
by the educational system;
Thus, the overall utility of the informational bridging factors used by different segments
of the education system is as follows;
a. VET schools: between 3 and 4 points;
b. Colleges: between 4 and 5;
c. Universities: between 5 and 6.
Core impressions from face-to-face interviews
Both the VETs, colleges, universities and businesses confirmed that there is some degree of
cooperation between them but that its utility is very low. For example, the interviewees
from the educational institutions found it far from easy to find internships with businesses;
spots are limited while demand is very high. It was mentioned that some businesses were
not even willing to take interns, considering them a burden, useless, etc. The complaint was
that often businesses send interns back home, asking them to show up just to sign the
necessary documents. On the other hand, businesses believe that the students are not
interested in working with them, but only wanted documented proof that they have
successfully passed the internship. An interviewee stated that when jobs are offered, students most often would refuse, reasoning that they would either start their own
company or that they were looking for a position in management.
All VET schools were interested in having a career center or a staffer to identify potential
internships, jobs, and to do anything necessary to enhance their students’ employability.
None of them have such services at the moment.
23
VET schools and universities do not provide any short term training programs.
VET schools governing councils, according to one of the interviewees; do not function
properly because members (especially those representing employers) are not selected
locally.
VET schools also state that they receive mandated standards but cannot find or develop
relevant training materials themselves.
Businesses reported that an important problem with educational institutions is that they are
still using Soviet-era professionals and that the lectures given are often outdated.
Businesses do not trust educational institutions and they believe that the educational system
is corrupt and essentially incapable of producing qualified professionals.
24
4. Evidence of mismatch
Employment turnover
One of statistical indicators for a mismatch between labor demand and supply is the turnover
of employment. The latest NSS data on the subject is for 2010; the 2008-2010 figures are
shown in Table 2; they reflect a time period of one year before the crisis sand one year after
2009 when the economy contracted by 14.1%.7
The employment turnover refers to the percentage of those fired and/or hired of those
employed full time. It is one of the very few NSS data relevant for monitoring labor demand and
supply. At the same time, Armenia seems flexible in terms of restriction to hiring and firing
workers.8
The Table below shows that hiring and firing rates for the country as a whole and in the
industrial sector remain roughly unchanged over a period of domestic and global economic
instability. It seems that every fifth worker in the country and every fourth in its industrial
sector are subject to losing his/her job once a year. The agrarian and construction sectors,
where the economic slowdown was particularly acute, demonstrate a greater dynamic.
Table 2: Employment turnover (2008-2010, medium and large enterprises)
Hired/Fired, in general
and by selected sectors
2008 2009 2010
(% of active workforce) Overall
Hired 20.8 18.5 20.4
Fired 20.1 18.3 18.7
Industry
Hired 28.4 25 27
Fired 32.9 26.7 25
Agriculture
Hired 49.4 42.4 66.7
Fired 37.5 35.1 63.4
Construction
Hired 65.6 71.5 89.6
Fired 67.6 73.1 83
Source: NSS
However, this situation may be a result of many factors.
According to one of the most reliable databases (“Enterprise Surveys” - 2009) Armenia’s position looks rather favorable in terms of workforce education not being identified as a
7 EBRD Office of the Chief Economist Regional Economic Prospects in EBRD Countries of Operations, October
2011, p. 16; available at: http://www.ebrd.com/downloads/news/REP_October_2011_181011_Final.pdf . 8 In the latest WEF Global Competitiveness Report (2011-2012) Armenia is in 18th place out of 142
countries in the world on this indicator (see: see p. 101 of the Report at:
http://reports.weforum.org/global-competitiveness-2011-2012 ); Economic Freedom of the World
Network (led by the Fraser Institute) gives Armenia a similar rank, see: Economic Freedom of the
World 2011 Annual Report, p. 30 (data for 2009), available at:
http://www.freetheworld.com/2011/reports/world/EFW2011_chap2.pdf .
25
significant problem: in 2009 it was believed to be a problem for 22.8% of the firms, while this
indicator for Europe and Central Asia was 30.7% and 27.4% for the world. The same found
that the percentage of permanent full-time employees that have received formal training (this is
an indicator relevant for manufacturing firms) was the same as that reflected in the NSS data for
the industrial sector – 25%.9
Employment turnover could result from relatively short time horizons for planning enterprise
operation or there could be a correlation with the fact that that in Armenia, the number of full-
time workers is 38.9 - about 10% lower than the average for Eastern Europe and Central Asia
and the world.10 For the lack of more detailed data and analyses, we assume the NSS
employment turnover data point to be a problem that shall be further analyzed and addressed.
Education institutions and private sector students
In Armenia medium- and large-scale companies report to NSS the number of workers trained
on the job or at VET institutions funded by the companies themselves.
In Armenia in 2009, the number of firms11 offering formal training to employees was lower than
in Eastern Europe and the Central Asia region - 30.4% compared to 33.9 and 35.4%
respectively.12 This corresponds to the above mentioned BEEPs 2009 findings. But, again, the
causality is not immediately evident.
It may be caused by multiple factors, some of them general: the level of competition in the
economy, the disposable company resources or tax regulations.13 Furthermore, there are many
labor market peculiarities. The number of full-time employees in Armenia is lower by the same
percentage as the number of firms offering formal training.14 Also, the proportion of unskilled
workers is significantly higher: 42.1% in Armenia, 24.6% in the region, and 32.6% in the world.
The relatively high proportion of unskilled workers among the employed workforce is
associated with the relatively low-skilled orientation of the Armenian economy. Thus, many
jobs are low-skilled in nature, so the issue of labor force qualifications does not represent, for
most employers, a binding constraint given the current structure of the economy. This is not
implying that the current level of qualifications is constraining the economy from moving
towards high value-added industries/jobs, and that such upgrading is not taking place as we
speak.
In fact, perhaps, both the statistics and surveys such as ours point at such a process.
9 See: http://enterprisesurveys.org/Data/ExploreEconomies/2009/armenia#workforce . 10 See: http://enterprisesurveys.org/Data/ExploreEconomies/2009/armenia#workforce . 11 Note that the indicator is not the same as data reported to NSS (number of employees trained at the expense
of the companies). 12 See BEEPs: http://enterprisesurveys.org/Data/ExploreEconomies/2009/armenia#workforce. In the BEEPS
methodology “formal education” means education of full-time workers in professional schools, colleges and
universities and received a certificate. 13 The current tax allowance for retaining employees is: up to 4% of the company’s revenue before tax, but not
more than AMD 3 mln. (USD 7.800) per employee trained outside the country and up to 1% of the company’s
revenue before tax but not more than AMD 1 mln. (USD 2.600) for in-country trainings. 14 BEEPs, Ibidem; in the same year the percentage of workers receiving formal training is also lower than in the
region and the world: 25.3% versus 33.7% and 46.9%.
26
In 2009, the situation was characterized by less formal training in terms of workers trained, and
more apparent satisfaction with labor force qualifications in terms of international comparison
of companies offering training. It is possible to expect that the situation is changing - in 2010
the number of trained workers increased by nearly 27%.
Tables 3: Number of VET Training Receivers by Training Venue
Total, persons
2007 2008 2009 2010
Trained, total 9610 9498 11977 16411
Of them
In an educational
institution 1598 2762 2686 3559
In the workplace 7273 6237 8709 12090
Abroad 739 499 582 762
Source: Labor market in Armenia, 2011, NSS.
Between 2007 and 2010 the number of individuals receiving vocational training at the
employers’ request increased by 41%. In the same period those trained on the job increased by
the same, 40%. The number of workers sent to educational institutions grew by 55%, but the
number of workplace trainees was consistently three times higher than the number of those
trained in VETs.15
On the supply side we see that the number of VET institutions is also rising. From 2008-2009,
the number of VET schools increased from 28 to 46, while the number of colleges remained
practically unchanged.16 According to the latest NSS data there are about 111,000 university
students, 27,600 college students and 6,600 trainees in VET schools, and 144,600
students/trainees altogether. In 2011, workers trained in educational institutions represented
11.3% of all students in the country; those trained on the job accounted for 8.4% of all
students/trainees.
The fact that on-the-job trainings grew somewhat faster than the number of those trained in
VET institutions should be interpreted as evidence that in Armenia, trainability is not equivalent to education. In Armenia, uneducated workers can achieve best practice and educated ones
often do not. Such conclusions have been made by William W. Lewis, who is a founder and
15 We should note that the Ernst & Young 2011 (published on February 25) General Industry Compensation and
Benefits Survey found that “in contrast to other CIS countries, where with the hit of the financial crisis the
companies shifted towards a higher proportion of internal trainings, Armenian companies indicated a higher
percentage of external versus internal trainings financed by the companies”: the average reported proportion was
0.7 versus 0.48 respectively.” This may be an indicator of an increased demand for qualified labor but not of a
basic shift in the pattern of company behavior. 16 At of the end of November 2011, The National Centre for Vocational Education and Training Development
(NCVETD) lists 34 VET schools; it is not clear what this difference means; perhaps a process of consolidation is
taking place and NCVETD has reflected this situation for the 2011-2012 school year, the list is available at the
Center’s website: http://www.mkuzak.am/am/education/ (the source is in Armenian).
27
CEO of the McKinsey Global Institute and partner at McKinsey & Co. He observed this
phenomenon for about 20 years in thirteen countries.17
The fact that on-the-job training can be a very important factor in determining worker
productivity is not new. In market economies, however, higher levels of academic achievement
are associated with higher levels of labor productivity and higher remuneration. In a
transitional economy like Armenia, with high unemployment and underemployment rates,
academic training may not be immediately relevant or, simply, may constitute a luxury that
cannot be easily afforded.
The data on employment turnover and private sector financing of VET programs should be
interpreted jointly. Despite the efforts and increased numbers of on-the-job trainees, turnover
rates remain at a relatively high level. It remains to be seen whether the last increase in 2011 in
trainee activity will make a difference in 2012.
For the time being, the impression of a basic supply/demand mismatch remains unchanged. This is in fact, well documented over years by the Global Competitiveness Report (GCR).18
In this regard, the country ranks 92nd out of 142 countries in the 2011-2012 rankings. It is
reasonable to assume that educational processes that rank considerably higher help ease labor
supply/demand mismatch, and vice-versa.
Table 4: Education processes and levels (ranks)
Education processes and levels Rank (1 – best, 142 – worst)
Secondary education enrollment, gross % 52
Tertiary education enrollment, gross % 49
Quality of the educational system 97
Quality of math and science education 81
Quality of management schools 131
Internet access in schools 92
Availability of research and training services 114
Extent of staff training 105
Source: WEF, op. cit.
Four out of the eight indicators in the WEF’s 5th Pillar (Higher Education and Training) are
identified by business executives as problematic. These include the following:
The overall quality of the educational system;
The extent of staff training;
The availability of research and training services;
17 William W. Lewis, The Power of Productivity: Wealth, Poverty and the Threat to Global Stability, The
University of Chicago Press, 2005, pp. 243, 245; the author continues: “in every economic sector in developing
countries, there is a reasonably wide range of productivity across firms. The most important evidence is from
firms that achieve productivity much higher than the industry average. Sometimes this productivity is even close to
best global practice. These examples indicate that the local labor forces are capable of achieving much higher labor
productivity than they do now. However, other factors have to be fixed for them to do so” (Ibidem). 18 This part of the GCR is based on Business Executive Surveys conducted by World Economic Forum partners in
Armenia.
28
The quality of management schools.
Youth unemployment in other countries and Armenia
Worldwide Experience
The unemployment situation for youth may be used as another indicator of the labor market
mismatches. Before reviewing the relevant data for Armenia, we should note that the majority
of developed and developing countries demonstrate the following characteristics:
Youth are 50-100% more likely to be unemployed in comparison to older, mid-career
work-force participants (see Chart 4.2 below);
In the third quarter of 2011, unemployment in the UK was at its peak – 8.3% but that of youth (16-24 years of age) – was 21.9% of the active youth labor force;19
Similarly, according to EUROSTAT, in the same period youth unemployment in Spain
was 44% while the economy-wide average was 22%; in Bulgaria the comparative figures
were 23.2% vs. 12.1%; in Greece 42.9% vs. 18.3%; in Latvia 30.2% vs. 15%; in Estonia
32.9 vs. 11.3%; in France 23.3 vs. 9.8%; and in Slovakia 32.7 vs. 13.6%.
As the following chart shows there is practically no difference between Euro zone area (EA)
and the European Union (EU) as a whole in terms of youth unemployment rates.
Chart 4.1
Youth unemployment rates, EU-27 and EA-17, seasonally adjusted, January 2000 - October 2011
Source: EUROSTAT
In the EU, the Euro zone and the United States, the youth unemployment rate is typically two
times higher than the overall unemployment rate, especially after 2008.
19 See UK Office of National Statistics 20111 Bulletin: http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171778_241735.pdf .
29
Chart 4.2
Unemployment rates: EU-27, EA-17, US and Japan, seasonally adjusted,
January 2000 - October 2011
Source: EUROSTAT
The most recent global data from the ILO puts youth unemployment at 12.6% (down from 12.8% in 2009); while by comparison for the non-EU and the former Soviet Union, it is about
20% on average.20
Armenia
Armenia’s situation is idiosyncratic in this regard.
In 2009 and 2010 the youth unemployment rate was 48.1 and 40.95%, respectively (among 15
to 19 year olds – 59.9 and 44.4%). For the overall developed world in general, the youth
unemployment rate is twice as high as the average unemployment, and in Armenia it is two and
a half times higher.21
The overall youth unemployment rate fell in2009-2010 for regulatory reasons – the schooling
period was expanded from ten to eleven years; according to regulatory norms, in 2011 it will
increase to twelve years. Thus, the 2011 youth employment rate can be expected to decline
again for 15-19 year-olds.
Equally important, is the group of 20-24 year olds, for whom the unemployment rate increased
from 36.2 to 37.5%.22 For this group, the unemployment in Armenia is 50% worse than for
Eastern Europe (non EU) and the former Soviet Union and almost three times worse than the
youth unemployment globally in 2010. The ILO has thus concluded that: “the low youth
employment rate shows that the economy does not create enough jobs for young persons
wishing to enter the labor market, at least in the formal economy.”23
20 Global Employment Trends 2011, Executive Summary, ILO, 2011, pp.3, 4. 21 Source: Integrated Living Conditions Survey (ILCS) 2009- 2010, NSS, 2011. 22 Source: Integrated Living Conditions Survey (ILCS) 2009- 2010, NSS, 2011. For details: see Attachment 2. 23 Youth employment in Eastern Europe: Crisis within the crisis, A background paper for the Informal Meeting of
Ministers of Labour and Social Affairs during the 100th Session of the International Labour Conference, ILO,
Geneva, 15 June 2011, p. 5.
30
Qualified labor: regular gaps identified by the World Bank
In October 2011, the World Bank survey on skills and education in New Europe and Central
Asia24 concludes that, irrespectively the dynamism of the transition from planned to market-
based economy, there are distinct labor market adjustment patterns which have emerged, most
particularly:
- The demand for skilled labor has risen;25
- Job creation is higher on average in occupations characterized by higher qualifications;26
- Relatively higher wage premia are found for university and college graduates;27
- Lack of skills hampers enterprise growth potential, as perceived by employers;28
- Skills mismatches are persistent, as measured by the time needed by firms to hire
specific categories of workers.29
24 The Survey results were first announced in Yerevan, in October 2011. The book has become available in
November, see: Lars Sondergaard and Mamta Murthi, with Dina Abu-Ghaida, Christian Bodewig, and Jan
Rutkowski, Skills, Not Just Diplomas: Managing Education for Results in Eastern Europe and Central Asia,
Washington D.C., The World Bank, 2012. 25 Ibidem, p. 22. 26 Ibidem, pp. 24-26; conf. also the following observation: “The typical pattern of change in occupational structure
has included (1) a substantial fall in demand for agricultural skills, (2) a fall in demand for manual labor, both skilled
and unskilled, (3) a rise in demand for service sector occupations, and finally, (4) a surge in demand for professional
skills. 27 Ibidem, pp.35-37. 28 In Armenia this perception is shared by 20-30% of the employers, as measured by BEEPS 2008 Survey, ibidem, p.
38. 29 Ibidem, p. 40 (BEEPS 2005 Survey).
31
Overall conclusions and recommendations
Conclusions
Workforce competitiveness refers to a system that enables individuals and enterprises to
develop labor market-relevant knowledge and skills for enhanced work productivity in specific
occupations. The system is driven by the opportunities for businesses to enhance profitability
and effectively share and satisfy their demand for scarce labor market skills30.
The system of communication between education and businesses uses all standard channels.
The level of satisfaction is below the medium score; the utility of the bridges existing at
university level is graded average 5 on a 10-score table and for colleges and VET schools it is
lower than that. The overall quality of the communications with businesses is 3.5 points for VET schools, 4.5 for colleges, and 5.5 for universities. The challenge is to better their utility of the
information exchange.
Another key problem is the level of trust in the system. On the one hand, VET schools and
universities complain that the businesses are not interested in cooperating. On the other hand,
businesses express dissatisfaction that the system does not produce needed specialists. The
statistics on employment turnover and workforce training seem to confirm that the trust deficit
is persistent. Youth unemployment performance underscores a similar problem, but recent
educational reforms may have an impact on the observed unemployment rates. It is no
accident, however, that WEF interviewees rate the entire education system relatively as poor.
The labor market supply/demand coordination system is inefficient and is correctly perceived as
such. In this regard the following statistical evidence is relevant;
a) The previously referenced relatively high level of turnover of employment,
irrespective of external factors (e.g. disregarding the global crisis);
b) In 2007-2010 the number of individuals receiving vocational training at an
employer’s request (and payment) in educational institutions and through on the job
training increased by roughly the same percentage - 41% and 40% respectively, while
a larger number of VET schools actually reduced the provision of on-the-job training
activities;
c) In 2009, the GDP declined by roughly 15%, but the basic pattern of educational
activities did not change. From 2007-2011, the number of schools increased and the
number of workers sent by employers to educational institutions increased but the
30
Conf.: Jee-Peng Tan, Robert McGough and Alexandria Valerio, Workforce Development in Developing
Countries: A Famework for Benchmarking, World Bank, January 2010, p. 2., see:
http://siteresources.worldbank.org/EDUCATION/Resources/278200-
1290520949227/WfD_Benchmarking_Framework.pdf
32
number of the workplace trainees was consistently three times higher than the
number of those trained within institutions;
d) By international standards, Armenia has a relatively high rate of youth
unemployment, which is especially visible in the subgroup of 19-24-year olds; the
inefficiency of the informational bridging mechanisms between business and
education is presumably most important for this group; we expect, however, that
the statistics will soon demonstrate a statistical improvement, reflecting the longer
mandated enrollment period for high school.
Recommendations
We recommend that future assessments of the system be conducted regularly, that the results
are compared with statistics information, and the statistics information is gradually improved.
There is clearly a need for a greater say of businesses in determining training priorities for
increased competition between the educational institutions and improved flexibility and
responsiveness of the educational system.
Upgrading bridges between labor supply and demand
Employability
The employability, alumni and internship factors (the first three of our “bridges”) are best
viewed jointly. These factors serve both to indicate the private sector’s willingness to invest in
the education system, and also it’s perceived incentives for doing so. In this regard, all
universities claim that they assist students finding jobs, but one-quarter of them lack alumni
programs and one-tenth lack internship initiatives, while the overall impact of these programs is
roughly 50-60%. This is an indication that:
a) future graduates are not fully engaged by their institutions in the search for competitive
careers, and in a significant number of cases the effort remains informal;
b) the most basic links to private sector that allow gaining experience and selling one’s own
capacities is missing for a significant segment of the system.
Obviously, in the educational institutions where these programs are missing, the most pressing
need is to create them. In those institutions where the programs’ quality is found
unsatisfactory, core efforts should be directed towards identification of specific deficiencies and
priority actions to address them.
The methodology and the questionnaires used in this report can be used for self-evaluation of
schools, colleges and universities, and/or for regular reviews of the efficiency of the system.
The relevant GOA bodies have already put the policy framework in place. Now is the time for
academic and private sector institutional actors to step in.
A system to evaluate and rate universities and colleges is still missing and MOES understands
that it is vital for boosting competition and providing key criteria for public funding. We
recommend that the creation of such system is outsourced to a private entity, selected with
the consent of the rectors. This approach was used in some Eastern European transitional
33
economy countries, and in some instances the creation of the system was financed by private
and public donors.
Last but not least, the internship programs can be influenced by key regulatory framework
factors including: the labor code definition of voluntary labor, tax regulations, etc. In this regard
EDMC plans to analyze detailed labor market regulatory constraints, but we recommend as
well, a general discussion on these matters that involves GOA bodies, academia, and chambers
and guilds.
Private sector involvement
The remaining bridges should be interpreted as mechanisms for improving employability and
the quality of informational exchanges between the demand and supply sides of the labor
market.
Key initial recommendations in this area include the following:
Colleges and universities should increase the participation of employers in curricula
development and in testing the “output” of the system.
It is common practice for university faculty members to work as consultants, though
their quality is generally assessed as low by those who pay for it. We believe in this
regard that educational institutions should consider attempting to increase the usage of
professors as consultants, and vice-versa, as a means to address remuneration and
institutional finance issues, and to promote greater student involvement in consulting
projects. In this regard the latest assessment of labor informality indicates that informal
labor in education is less than 7%.31 This appears to underscore the limited utilization of
consulting professionals as teachers. A fundamentally important way to address business
dissatisfaction with course quality is in fact to invite business professionals to teach
courses at educational institutions.
The regulatory frameworks (tax code and fiscal regulations), practical arrangements, and
institutional initiatives to allow for private sector participation in financing schools,
colleges, and universities, should be the subject of a separate analysis. As far as we can judge, the current fiscal framework appears to be sufficiently flexible, but our survey
indicates there are problems with both the availability of privately financed courses and
R&D, and with the quality of organizing such courses and programs.
Follow up
EDMC will assist Armenia to overcome critical skills constraints through the following key
activities:
31 See: ADB, NSS, The Informal Sector and the Informal Employment in Armenia, 2010, p. 44. The ADB (and ILO)
methodology of measuring informal labor is based (among other details) on counting second, temporary contracts.
Presumably, such contracts are normal practice. The policy of using them should be left to universities/colleges’
discretion and the best practice is not to punish their utilization through fiscal disincentives.
34
1. Conduct a periodic, focused survey of both employers and selected VET schools to assess:
(a) the relevance of training courses/materials to employer needs, and (b) the
coherence/efficiency of institutional feedback mechanisms between employers and training
institutions in EDMC’s selected sub-sectors.
2. Review labor market conditions in these sub-sectors.
3. Work with businesses from those sub-sectors and relevant educational institutions to
improve the density and quality characterizing the information flow between the supply and
demand sides of the labor market for these sub-sectors. This will include providing
information on linkages between labor market supply and demand to VET schools,
businesses and policy makers, including the following possible types of information: model
curricula and training materials; assessment of skills in demand by various sectors in the
economy; openings in companies for short-term and long-term employment and
internships; and skills requirements in various sectors.
4. Work with relevant educational institutions to increase their contacts with the private
sector, to improve their understanding of the skills demanded by the labor market, to
improve cooperation in curricula development, and also to improve their capacity to place students in internships, for part-time jobs during their time in school, and for permanent
jobs after completion of their programs.
5. Initiate a comprehensive revision of curricula in select VET topics consistent with business
needs. This should include guidelines and principles, model study plans, and targeted
training programs for teachers.
6. Work with selected institutions to develop or improve short-term and pilot courses that
address business needs, through curriculum development and targeted training of teachers.
7. Work with VET schools to greatly increase their emphasis on employment for students, of
all kinds: paid and unpaid internships, summer employment, and part-time jobs, including
work related and unrelated to areas of study.
8. Review of applicable laws and regulations that might impede participation of the private
sector in curriculum development, teaching and/or internships and the hiring of students for
part-time jobs while they are studying, and propose revisions.
35
Appendix 1
Averages for educational institutions
VET schools
Colleges
Universities
36
Appendix 2. Questionnaires on bridges between business and education
Schools / colleges / universities questionnaire
The purpose of this questionnaire is to understand whether VET schools, colleges and universities make
attempts to increase the employability of their students though adjusting their knowledge and skills to
what is needed by businesses.
Below we list several means of matching supply and demand for useful qualifications. We ask you to
answer “yes” or “no” as to whether the mechanism in question exists or not, and if the answer is “yes”
to grade it in terms of quality (usefulness for the students, graduates, the school or the university).
The answers will be summarized and used to deliberate on what is needed to improve the cooperation
between businesses and educational institutions. Only aggregated data will be used. This questionnaire
can be applied also for self-evaluation.
Opportunity No Yes Quality “yes”
(1-poor – 10
excellent)
1 Are there programs to assist students in finding jobs?
2 Is there participation of those who graduated in other school/colleges/
university programs and projects?
3 Are there easy and popular internship practices?
4 Is there private (enterprise) sector participation in curricula development?
5 Do teachers and professors work as consultants and on part-time contract
with businesses to help themselves and schools/colleges/universities?
6 Are there courses/ trainings by and for business executives?
7 Is there private (enterprise) financing of courses and R & D?
8 Are there joint events attended by both teachers/academics and businesses?
9 Are businesses involved in the evaluation of education (and curricula)
quality?
10 Are there dual/joint careers: teachers/academics who work on a longer term
basis in businesses (enterprises) and entrepreneurs in academia?
37
2. Business chambers and guilds questionnaire
The purpose of this questionnaire is to understand whether VET schools, colleges and universities make
attempts to increase the employability of their students though adjusting their knowledge and skills to
what is needed by businesses.
Below, we list several means of matching supply and demand for employable qualifications. We ask you
to answer “yes” or “no” as to whether the mechanism in question exists or not, and if the answer is
“yes” to grade it in terms of quality (usefulness for the students, graduates, the school or the university).
The answers will be summarized and used to deliberate on what is needed to improve the cooperation
between businesses and educational institutions. Only aggregated data will be used. This questionnaire
can be applied also for self-evaluation.
Opportunity No Yes If “yes” – how useful
the cooperation is
(1-not at all – 10
absolutely)
1 Do schools / universities approach you when they assist students and
graduates finding jobs?
2 Do you ask school/university undergraduates to take part in your
company and/or association operations, programs and projects?
3 Do you accept interns?
4 Do you participate in school/colleges/university curricula development
for professions your company/guild would need?
5 Do you (your organization) invite teachers and professors to work as
consultants and on part-time contract?
6 Are you (members of your organization) invited to teach and train in
schools/universities that educate professionals you may need?
7 Do you (members of your organization) finance courses and R & D at
schools/colleges/universities?
8 Do you take part in events attended by both teachers/academics and
businesses?
9 Do you participate in the evaluation of education (and curricula)
qualities for professions you may need?
10 Are there dual/joint careers in your company, meaning do
teachers/academics work on a longer term basis in businesses and
entrepreneurs in academia?
38
Appendix 3. Surveyed and interviewed organizations
List of surveyed organizations
VET schools
1. Yerevan #1
2. Gyumri #4
3. Ashtarak
4. Echmiatsin l
5. Sevan
6. Vanadzor #1
7. Abovyan #1
8. Qajaran l
9. Berd l
Colleges
10. Yerevan State Trade and Service College
11. Yerevan State Engineering College
12. Talin State Craftsmanship College
13. Vanadzor State Technological College
14. Hrazdan State College
15. Kapan State Trade and Service College
16. Yegheghnadzor State College
Universities
17. Yerevan State University
18. European Regional Academy of Caucuses
19. State Engineering University of Armenia
20. State Economics University of Armenia, Gyumri
21. Echmiatsin Grigor Lusavorich University
22. Gavar State University
23. Vanadzor Mkhitar Gosh International University
24. Hrazdan Humanitarian Institute
25. Goris State University
26. Yeghegnadzor Giteliq University Foundation
27. American University of Armenia
28. Russian Armenian (Slavonic) University
29. French University
Business Organizations and Chambers
30. The American Chamber of Commerce in Armenia
31. Chamber of Commerce and Industries of RA (headquarters)
32. Chamber of Commerce and Industries Gegharkunik
33. Chamber of Commerce and Industries Lori
34. Chamber of Commerce and Industries Kotayk
35. The Union of Manufacturers and Businessmen (Employers) of Armenia
36. Shirak Competitiveness Center
39
Reference group
37. Caucasus Research Resource center (CRRC)
38. Microsoft Innovation Center
39. Bi-Line
40. Economic Consulting Service of Gyumri
List of interviewed organizations
Educational Organizations
1. Yerevan State University
2. International Center for Agribusiness Research and Education (ICARE) Foundation,
3. Echmiatsin Grigor Lusavorich University
4. Gyumri #4 VET school
5. Yerevan #1 VET school
6. Gyumri State Technological College
7. Yerevan Armenian Greek State College of Tourism
8. Gyumri Information Technology Center
9. Gyumri State Engineering College
Government
1. Gyumri Technopark
2. Ministry of Education and Science
3. VET Development National Center
4. National Statistics Service
5. Shirak Marzpetaran/education department
Donors
6. GIZ
7. DVV International
8. UNDP
9. EU delegation
10. World Bank
Businesses
11. Festo ges. M.b.H./Festo Didactic Gmbh & Co. KG
12. Amasya Cheese Factory
13. G&V Textile factory
14. Lentex textile factory
15. Cherkezi Dzor Fishery and Restaurant
